Dear Ted, I've written to you before a few years back. I'm a photo journalist based in Asia and I watched Tony's video and was quite blown away. Just a little back story, I was in Pakistan in the 80's and have been to the refugee camp in Peshawar a few times. And I also know Steve and have interviewed him. Please remember Nat Geo is NOT a daily news media such as the many daily's around, Nat Geo is what it is a Geographic publication about the world with concentration of its content on Geo, hence the name. In the 1980's the world was a very different place Steve had a job to do and was given the task of getting a front cover for the month. He saw this young girl and like all of photojournalist you identify the subject and try to get the shot needed for the cover. Now going back to Tony who was only 11 years old at the time has no idea what its like to be in the shoes of Steve or as an assignment photographer for a leading magazine. I've got my shares of front covers for Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, BBC, Boston Globe etc. The pressure is immense to get the shot for the front cover, your photo editors or "desker's " are waiting for your cover shot and its gotta be powerful. Steve as pro as he is found it took the shot and the rest is history. But for Tony's trash him 40 years later is out of line. He should have know better than to simply make damaging accusations and claims as he did. 99 percent of us photojournalist do not take part in KZfaqing as we are to busy on assignments and taking images as we are trained to do and not spend all week making KZfaq video's for social currency. Photography you tubers that I watch, I'm sure have very few published work. And when I mean published work I mean in world class daily's such as the WSJ, CNN, LA Times etc. Not your local paper, its pressure that is beyond words. Steve is a wonderful man and one the great photographers and its a shame Tony comes along and tries to discredit Steve's work he has been doing for many years. Steve is story teller using photography to tell his story. But speaking ill of Steve for social currency and clicks is just bad. Hope this has been a bit helpful.

Northrup's article is not investigative reporting and you two are not peer reviewers. Peer reviewing is an academic process. Northrup has an opinion based on secondary research. In my further researches, I just looked at a DPReview thread from 2013 and almost all of the issues Northrup raises are already there, so he did not invent his opinion out of thin air!

This was really confusing without some context. For anyone else who was confused, the “event” they are referring to is the controversy over a video about the Afghan Girl uploaded on Tony & Chelsea Northrup’s channel.

So what is worse; the original exploitation, the exploitation of that exploitation, the exploitation of the exploitation of the exploitation, your confirmation bias or my confirmation bias?

"I'm not making assumptions about anybody, but that is the case". Do you know what an assumption is, Jaron? It's what you said right before this statement!

It's the algorithms that leads to analytics that leads to content creation. TV and press media never had instant access to analytics.

Interesting video, however I missed the part where you showed evidence that the original video was inaccurate. This feels like massive double standards, criticising another KZfaqr for not having evidence then showing no evidence yourself. Just your own opinion that he’s wrong. How are you any different and how do you know he’s not been forced to take it down for threat of legal action, regardless of evidence, as you talk about?

This is one reason why I love your channel. You don't throw something into the world easily. You take your time to do it right and with reason.

Saw that video. Not impressed. Anyway, Ted, you are NOT quitting KZfaq and if you need funding to create more artists series, say so. Create a Patreon or whatever. I have no idea how it works but I’ll find out if it keeps your channel going. I got dragged in when you were talking about the old masters using Pinterest and haven’t stopped watching since. Oh, and there is one episode of the artist series I hope you’ll get to make some day. Don Mccullin. I’d pay for that alone. Anyways, keep going.

Would be interesting to see this conversation continued, now that Tony has issued a correction and full source list.

Wow, what a discussion! As a former English teacher, current high school digital media teacher, and person with a KZfaq channel, I can’t thank you enough for highlighting the importance and efforts of true journalism. I’m disappointed that a well known and usually trusted source would handle a situation this way. But again, I’m SO grateful to you guys for having this discussion. 👍

Thanks Ted. This is desperately needed. Your work is outstanding and I love the artist series.

Name the last time NYT or WAPO front paged a retraction. All they do is leave a tiny little foot note on the original story, that no one is ever going to read because everyone already read the article.

Enjoyed this video, thank you. The monster you were reffering to, can ruin someone's reputation, make a false idol, as well as cause some real economic damage by, for example, cutting sales for some companies (cameras are good example - some minor issue, which can often be fixed after simply getting more familiar with a product, can be the main focus of several reviews, replicated dozens or even handreds of times all over youtube in a matter of days). İn my opinion people over internet are driven by simple emotions rather than reason nowadays much more than it was even 5 years ago. Act first, think later, or even worse - just act and forget. All that matters is today's agenda. It affects photography as an art as well - If your photo is not 'pop', i.e. does not leave a burning trace on eye retina, it would probably be unnoticed. No matter the content/conceptionx composition/skill because those often require time and some reflexion to be fully understood and appreciated. So this goes both ways: content creators - are rarely motivated to spend time to do a qualified job, because all is required to get views is a pop image/ loud informational occasion. And consumers/audience don't want to take enough time to find quality content/ make a factcheck/reflex when there is so much vivid/loud content/trends out there, or simply can't because it is easy to get lost in all this abundance and variety of bs...

Ted- from the bottom of my heart, thank you for this. You two touched on so many important things that bother me about the industry and the world in general. In particular, sharing your response to posting the artist’s series was powerful. I found the honesty refreshing and relatable... it’s nice to know that it’s not just me who feels that way when I share my work. Thank you dude.

Thanks guys for an open and honest talk/discussion which hit a lot of home runs for me. You highlighted a lot of the issues, I have with some of the channels and I can add a few more! I’m sure we have all seen the videos based off of a spec sheet or a press release , they then rubbish it for not having some cool feature that is this months ‘flavour of the month’ but then at the end they give a short link to pre-order one... what!! I tire of reviews that concentrate on the downside of a cameras video performance, whilst omitting to say anything about its stills performance. Some of us never use the video features, we don’t care... but try finding a balanced review of the stills performance is becoming harder and harder. Keep up the hard work Ted, thank you for all that you do.

Only facts matter, not emotions and feelings, beliefs, etc.... and Tonys video is full of undeniable errors: Tony states that McCurry entered the school and approached Gula without permission. This is contrary to McCurry's version in which the teacher invited him to enter, gave permission for him to photograph the girls and was with McCurry the whole time. Tony states that McCurry violated Gula's cultural prohibition against a girl 8-years of age or older from being in a room with an adult male who is not a family member, from showing her face to an adult male and from making direct eye contact with an adult male. This is contrary to McCurry's version in which he states that such prohibitions apply to adolescent girls but not to younger children. Gula is on the record saying she was 10 at the time of the photo. And to reiterate, McCurry's version of the facts is that the teacher gave permission for and was present during the shoot. Tony describes McCurry as being interested only in Gula and as photographing only Gula. This is contrary to McCurry's version, in which he reports photographing several other girls before working with Gula. According to McCurry, he then made several photos of Gula to establish a rapport. The teacher helped put Gula at ease by telling the young girl the photograph would be used to tell the world about Afghan refugee suffering. Tony states that the only explanation for the framing of the photo is that McCurry wanted it for a cover shot. He implies McCurry knew it would be a cover. McCurry is on the record saying he didn't know the photo would be a cover until months later when he met with editors in Washington DC to review photos from that assignment. Tony quotes Gula as saying she "was scared to death." In McCurry's telling, Gula was nervous but not frightened; not terrified. After making the photos, Gula ran off to play with her classmates. Decades later, Gula went on the record talking about being proud of the photo, the positive impact it has had on her and the larger Pashtun community. Tony emphasizes that McCurry didn't get her name, background info or father's permission to make or publish the photo. He neglects to state that McCurry has said he got permission from the teacher. Tony also did not mention the multiple attempts McCurry made during the 1990s to locate the subject of that famous photo. Tony continues to tell a story in which National Geographic tracks Gula down in 2002 and manipulates her to permit McCurry to photograph her, again. The way Tony tells the story, saying it's essentially a instance of violation. This is contrary to the record. Gula is on the record staying she is proud of the photograph, the impact it has had on her and other Pashtuns. Further more, having contacted a Steve McCurray family member (i wont say which), theyre upset at the 1st and 2nd video both.

Even in the comments here on your video people are pointing, blaming, and accusing other of their actions. It seems almost impossible to have people remain civil and actually do their research for any topic. I really enjoyed this video format of your podcast and I hope you two do more. I especially liked this topic.

Ted, your artist series is the most amazing thing. It may take making camera reviews till the end of time in order to stay relevant. But, it's worth it if it enables you to share your work of love. Thank you so much for sharing them with all of us!

Hi Ted! I don't know if you'll read this comment, but I want you to know that the Artist Series is one of your bodies of work that got me hooked on your channel. I gained so much respect for you after watching those videos and was inspired to my core. Learning about the history, philosophies, and techniques of these photographers encouraged me to continue developing my own style. Whether it was Grobet talking about her love for Blue Demon, or Wilson describing her experience as Avedon's assistant, I felt like I could relate to those people. Not only was I amazed by their work and the stories they told, but I felt like I was capable of telling my own stories; Just like them. I want to be an artist. I want my photographs to convey emotion; to document culture. I believed I could after watching the Artist Series. It may have been a flop, and I completely understand why that's infuriating after watching this video, but now you know there's one more person out there who was exceptionally inspired and educated by your hard work.

1) The snippets of the interview with the television show has a full version that Tony simply used one small part of where Sharbat Gula speaks about her difficult times. He conveniently left out out the parts where she was laughing and joking around with the hosts. 2) She was detained not because of the picture, but because it was found that her documents were fake (in such a situation, you will be deported no matter how famous you are, no matter which country is in question). This happened many years after the picture was taken. Tony conveniently left that out. 3) Sharbat Gula was gifted a 3,000 sqf home to live in and receives USD 700 every month. According to Tony, she was left alone with nothing. 4) There is a BBC interview where Sharbat Gula says that when she was young she was uncomfortable but later when she saw the impact her image was able to create, she was happy. Tony suggested that she was abused and used. But, the interview suggests from the subject of the controversy claims otherwise. 5) Tony and Chelsea claimed that Nat Geo and McCurry did not respond to them. Another lesser popular KZfaqr claimed he received a reply from McCurry in 5 hours. There seems to be more facts destroying Tony's claims and even suggests some fabrications to what really happened at the shoot, and the living conditions of Sharbat Gula by Tony. McCurry is a photojournalist who has risked his life to cover wars and create important works of history. Tony on the otherhand is a KZfaqr with very little professional work in his credentials. I prefer to give McCurry the benefit of the doubt over Tony. Tony is not a working photographer, he is an educator at best. And I take offence when an educator pieces together selective bits and presents them as facts. I concur with the guys in this video, there is no source out there that supports Tony claims. I don't know what some of you were smoking when you decided to defend Tony but I found so much that debunks nearly everything tony said by just doing a simple google search on Sharbat Gula.

51 minutes of the same stuff gets a bit boring. They could have given their opinion in less than ten minutes.

Thanks for the interesting take on the matter and in depth video ! Just would like to add two things to the discussions: (i) Did one of you went to the McCurry photo expo which was showed one or two years ago? Because, if I remember correctly, McCurry himself in the audio commentary said he talked quite a lot and had to insist for the girl to remove its tchadri and that she seemed reluctant. Not giving any opinion on the matter and the intention of McCurry, this is all speculative. Second thing, which has to do with peer-reviewed. I worked in academia for several years and got to published scientific papers. And in fact, the peer-reviewed process mostly starts before the publication, when revising and commenting the manuscript of the paper. It is only when the necessary modifications have been made to the study that the editor actually decides if the manuscript is suitable for publication or not. Of course, there will be debate after the publication, and the quality of accepted papers varies greatly. However, the problem of a controversial paper being largely spread by medias without any counter-arguments is indeed an issue, which has little less to do with peer-reviewed process.

Ted, I have to say that the single most beneficial and enjoyable series I have seen on KZfaq or documentaries in general has been your Artists Series. I watch them over and over again. It's had a huge impact on my work as a photographer and artist. Thank you again sir!

Thanks for this Ted. I create content on disability for amputees (as I am one), and not getting the views that some people do, who make content similar to mine, often makes me doubt what I put out there. Your video has made me re-assess what I do, and I've realised that my content is accurate, supportive, helpful, and most importantly, non-sensationalist. I will never get the subs and views that the sensation seekers attract, but I feel good about my content. It's real, and as I understand from you guys, ethical. The message I get from you is that this is what really matters.

You’re the best Ted! I know there are many photography KZfaq channels I really only have time for yours anymore.

Agree 100 percent. I worked as a photojournalist for 12 years. Former staffer at the Chicago Tribune. Now I work contribute to The New York Times and The WSJ and this stuff drives me bananas. Thanks for the video. This has been needed.

Dude, trust me. We get it. KZfaq keeps putting some garbage in our click path based on past successes in a channel but as a full time working pro photographer I can speak for myself And say ... your channel is quality! It’s recognized!

Just an fyi: when you say peer-review you actually mean replication study. Otherwise great and important topic. I think for all of us one thing is true: time is a limited resource. So we all have that problem of just looking at one source and trusting that. And yes we all need to - at least once in a while - make sure that those sources are still trustworthy.

Thank you for this Ted!

Ted, i've been subscribed to your channel for years now. This video reminded me of the reason. You're willing and very able to take on the topics, that you know very well are not going to go viral, but still are IMPORTANT. Important from an ethical standpoint, from an artistic standpoint. I love and respect you for that, as i realise this kind of content creation involves some very hard to make decisions and integrity. Both things, unfortunately many very successful channels aren't willing to provide. Very very important video here, thank both of you!

Love this conversation. In my days as a very active Wikipedian I learned to double check som much sources and discovered so many facts that were unclear. Being a Wikipedian is a great school for the internet.

Good discussion. You're so right about the beast!! Love your channel. I'm a little confused by Jaron's statement kind of criticizing those who didn't go to journalism school to "learn how to have journalistic ethics" followed by Jaron saying, "actually consider myself a journalist" yet having a diploma for BA degree in Business hanging there. Perhaps the frame above it is degree in Journalism? Does the 10,000 hour rule apply here? For all the fuss you make about checking sources, you should know Tony posted on twitter on the 6th why he took it down and what's going on, but this was posted on the 7th. I didn't hear any mention of that. I'd expect to see a post pinned to the top providing that additional information, to be ethical. Not to nitpick, but I think the work you're groping for is retraction not redaction. Redaction is the blacking out of content to be protected in a document. I agree with Ryan's comment below, the the Time buries their retractions.

I watched this video from "he who shall not be named" and with his reputation coming under fire more and more lately I checked the sources. But I was amazed at how many people praised his "investigative" work and how he opened their eyes 🤦‍♀️

You guys have just summarized almost all of our current media. Headlines on pg. 1, redaction in the small print on the last page.

This was very important. Even though i could tell how important this was going to be, i hesitated for a moment before clicking on it. Hesitated, because it was long and i knew it would be a heavy subject and i felt like i was looking for something light. It's sad how easy it is to skip the really important videos and news stories, because they feel too hard. Thank you Ted and Jaron for doing this even though you know stuff like this won't unfortunatly get as much visibility as other content.

Great video. Thanks Guys. I love the idea of peer review on important videos, but 2 things spring to mind. 1. who has the time to dedicated reviewing each others work 'in our field'? And 2. given the race to get content out, it sometimes leads to a competitive spirit, so is it realistic to even hope for? Again thanks for the video. Food for thought definitely.

If it isn't about high ISO performance or whether a camera crops in 4k, I'm not interested ; )

Last I looked there was still a switch to off, or move on, Your content is very much appreciated. I learn something on every episode, Bravo et Merci!

Catching up on your older presentations, Ted, realizing what a valuable asset your channel is. I'm not a gear-head as I only watch segments that deal with my two brands, but I really enjoy and learn from your other videos. Your "Artist" series is inspiring and worth waiting for. Live long and prosper...

One card slot is the end of the world. Digital ISO is fairy dust. Afghan girl serially abused by heartless American photojournalist. This mania is becoming worse by the day. Send him to KZfaq rehab so he can get back to explaining how back button focus works.

I think the explanation of peer review is wrong, academic studies are not published until they have been peer reviewed, not after.

Love it! Seek truth/ seeking the best obtainable truth what photo journalists/ investigative journalists ought to do. Media and ethics!

I've watched many of your videos, but never saw this one. Outstanding! So spot-on and appreciated! I'm not one to comment, but sometimes we need to speak up when people contribute positively to counteract all the static out there. And I'm one of those that thoroughly enjoyed The Artist Series! Sad that it was not financially viable. Anyway...thanks for the inspiration!

Love the discussion. And Woodward and Bernstein are household names. Just saying.

They do not front page their redactions. Maybe they have done it before but they don't do it very often.

I saw randomly your video which however find them incredibly interesting. Working in the research (academic) field I found pretty interesting the matter relatives to the peer-review. In fact, in my opinion you raised a much deeper (social) problems. The new technology and in general the digital technology has gave us (especially new generations) the perception of the time very distorted. Human brains as well as action with consequent assessment methods to prove or disprove theories and studies, require time. You see how the internet, and in general our lives has changed through the years. More rush, more things to do with the willing to do everything without reject anything cause we can, no matter what but we can. Well, talking about Internet, it opened up possibility of learning fastly, everywhere you are, and sharing fastly things with people that live in opposite parts of the world, something very demanding and slow 30 years ago.This, of course, in good and bad. After this slight digression we can link this reasoning to the main topic about the peer-review, which requires time to be done, a time that we (as reader or listener) do not give and probably not accept because we are inside this loop on where news are published and then taken as truth despite, as you said, they are completely wrong, but they go viral and they make the scoop. The problems about our anxiety in getting quickly an answer or even success has led to simply superficial Lives. the society moves fast, the news (unfortunately) move too fast, but the methods or researching process to accept or deny someone's theory requires time. a time we do not accept. Also, as you previously mentioned, people is expecting to find the meal already prepared all the time (news that are true and already proved), so it means that they do not have the willing to look for the ORIGINAL sources neither because they think to not be supposed to do so, nor because they don't want to spend their time on that. This is more than a simply problems between media-and-readers, personally I think this is something much deeply eradicated in our "new" society which is quite a eerie statement indeed. Best. Alex

Stay true to your craft, Ted. Your channel content is the best. Your videos are always educational and inspirational, which is what I am looking for in a photography based KZfaq channel. Creating content is hard work, but quality is more important than being first to post, in my opinion.

Gonna be a lot of awkward moments at the next Sony/Canon press conference. lol

I think the national G photography is more documentary photo than anything else. If you doubt It you should watch Werner Hertzogs view on docu. I think Nat G photo fits in it.

Pls don't stop posting KZfaq videos Ted. Your content and channel is breath of fresh air. Your videos are one of a few first videos I watched to help me gather the courage to dive into photography and the goal to go full time in a few years. You inspired. Keep up the good work!!

Thank you guys for giving me the chance as i viewer/ listener to take a step back and look at the bigger picture, away from this circle of mass content we call "news" or "reviews" (aka monster). Appreciate it.

The fact that the video has disappeared tells you all you need to know

Did you reach out to Northrup in the way you said he should reached outs to McCurry?

I work in local journalism doing social media for them and I completely understand all of the points you made. It is very frustrating.

I know I'm late to the party on this one... but I just wanted to thank you both for putting out a video with some intentionality. I feel like in the "race for views", people often overlook these sorts of discussions, and I feel like it's a real detriment to our understanding and our community at large. Please make more of this thoughtful content, and Ted, as a huge fan of the "Artist Series", thank you for all your hard work.

unfortunately it's becoming a race to the bottom :-(

Any reason you refuse to name the individual, TONY NORTHRUP, that behaved in the manner you spend an hour criticizing?

Very good job! Was hoping you would give your take. Your artist series are my favorite as well as your talking about photographers and their styles of photography.

I agree in most of the conversation you guys had.. In order to do an specific topic you must be prepared for it.. In order to present a clear opinion or investigation, you have to probe your thesis is valid and plan your general and specific objectives.. You cannot jump in conclusions without knowing reasons.. One of the many reasons is lack of education. Sometimes people think they know a specific topic without a valid argument. I remember in high school I learn investigation as part of my curriculum before graduate. The reason was I have to do a Thesis that have to be validated and took a full year to do it.. Of course you learn by mistakes and that help in your future of your career no matter which one you choose. In fact after going to university and graduate as Graphic and Industrial Designer ( photography was part of the graphic since involve commercial, fashion, advertising etc) I had to do a final project in order to graduated it. The main point. You always have to be prepared. Doing research help a lot in everything around. Not only photography, arts, science, journalism, etc.. New generation don't care about researching because everything that is online, only a small percentage is right the rest is wrong.. So be professional and don't fall in this issues.. As you guys said or in other words is I rather recognize my own mistakes and be thankful that people support me no matter the case and grow up more and be better than let it go and lose what I have build (reputation) with a bad desicion or judgement from my side to others for not be prepared enough to dispute an argument and damage someone integrity or get sue for my stupidity... Good video :)

Your right I didn't check any sources. I Had some respect for Tony. Why would he do this? He needs to explain why he did this.

I find it deeply problematic that you two are trying to preach good journalistic practice and so on, while claiming to have searched through all relevant source material without having found anything that backs up Tony's "accusations". Thereby accusing Tony for fabricating this and just taking on Steve McCurry, just for the sake of taking on Steve McCurry and miscredit him. 1. I've checked those sources too, and both the National Geographics article and their documentary (in four parts here on KZfaq) support what Tony has said in the video. There is only one detail I can't find anywhere, and that's that she wore a burka before the original photo was taken. The rest is absolutely backed up by the same sources that you yourselves are referring to. You guys are simply reading it the way you want to read it. And now you're both accusing Tony for lying and all sorts of other things while ridiculing him and his methods in general. You're doing e-x-a-c-t-l-y what you accuse him for yourselves. I'll be happy to list all quotes from both article and documentary if you'll confirm that you're actually reading this. I've already done this elsewhere, so it'll both be quick and easy for me to to do, and on the other hand pointless if you don't care.

You have to wonder about the people who give this video a thumbs down. Who are they and why do they hate important content? Do they speak English? Do they have any kind of education above middle school? I found this to be a very important reminder. Thank you.

I made this comment also on one of the reporter's videos. There is also a responsibility to make sure that those who can't defend themselves and who have a suppressed position in society aren't taken advantage of. The fact that a foreign man can come into a situation and exert his will (for good or bad) with great affect, says something about the balance of power in this world. Those with power must have the capacity to have their power "checked" - that's what this is about to me.

Excellent topic guys, thanks for trying to shed some light on proper journalistic practices. As someone who has spent 25 years in photojournalism, I appreciate that you took the time to point out what is wrong with the video we all have seen and those types of videos being posted on the Internet. Keep up the good work!

The recent track record of The NY Times and Washington Post is not so good, but your point remains valid. WAPO was one of several news organizations that ran with a false and disparaging story against the Covington HS students. Rather than retract, they ran an editor’s note 30 days later explaining some errors, but minimizing their responsibility. The NYT ran an above the fold page one story alleging presidential candidate John McCain was having an affair with a lobbyist based only on them having had lunch together. The full retraction came much later, but was buried in the paper. Worse, at that same time, their journalists knew about the affair between Reillie Hunter and presidential candidate John Edwards, knew about the child, but they sank the story until it broke in another publication a year later. What you’re describing is the ideal, the aspirational goal of ethical journalism. In practice, they’re falling short. Like I wrote, your point remains valid.

The basic rule in taking in any form of media these days is that you have to be able determine the real from the fake. It is getting harder and harder and the only way it will change is through good education. We the consumers allow it happen and we shouldn't. Thank you Ted and Jaron for your views and be encouraged Ted that, as a retiree clicking on a lot of KZfaq channels about photography these days, I keep coming back to The Art of Photography. Your Artist Series, especially the one on David Brookover, has been a particular inspiration to me and I look forward to your new videos.

Thanks Ted - I love these videos that address the ethics and professional issues that we as photographers face. Steve McCurry is one of my major inspirations as his work and experiences speak to me. Let's focus on the quality of the work and the contribution we make as photographers and world citizens!

The other obvious fact is that Northrup is not doing investigative journalism. He is gathering known facts and coming to a different conclusion. It's secondary research.

You have an excellent channel with insightful and enjoyable content. Been a fan since the podcast on iTunes. Keep doing whatever you feel is right for the channel and I’ll keep watching. Cheers.

Thank you so much Ted and Jaron This is a video I think everybody who is consuming social media should watch. We all have to be more critical about what we read or watch there and check the facts. It too easy for people these days to get up on their "soapbox" and say something that may not be truth.

Thanks, Ted and Jaron. This is a topic that did need to be discussed.

I miss your other type of videos TED, the ones when you used to go to print labs or when you hang out with your friends to shoot with medium format. I would love to see you doing stuff other than gear reviews.

Seriously though, why is everybody getting so upset about what Tony did? People tend to not like it when strangers shove a camera up in your face, and I can really imagine how it must've felt for this little girl when the photo was taken. Stop getting so defensive about this old man just because he's someone you idolize. Photographers tend to do basically anything to get the shot, and it happens that people step over boundaries. Tony brings up something that should be in the back of peoples mind a lot more, he's not just ruthlessly attacking McCurry. Both sides of the argument have good points. Challenge yourself, and don't just assume that the shot is yours to take at all points

I absolutely love your content and I am defitnitely one of those who barely gets any views or subs lol. And it's partly the reason why I stopped uploading regularly. Your words have definitely helped. I love your videos because your perpective is always well thought out and you always present something different to the regular mob of photography content that gets thrown at us by youtube. I find your content interesting and entertaining.

In this age of “alternative facts”, opinion has become more important. Whichever interpretation of a story you wish to believe becomes a rallying point. Fact checking (from either viewpoint) falls by the wayside.

Well done video guys. I somewhat get why people go through all these lengths to create clicks. I don't agree with it. Heck I try to get attention the honest way with the podcasts I do and can see why people fall in to the trap of doing what Tony Northrup et al do on their feeds. It's hard getting noticed staying clean. You have Ted, you have kept at this for all these years. Others what instant success and do whatever to get there. Thanks again for your thoughtful insights in to the industry and art world. Hopefully this scenario can be used to help us all learn something. Btw I did go to university and when doing my doctoral studies I had to make sure my sources were sound, but sadly this is not the way of the world for most others. Ciao, CWDaly

Tony put the original video back up with a plethora of sources and some clarification...

The Subject is Sharbat Gula photographed in 1985 she was 10 years old. In a BBC youtube video --kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mcyJZd2X253DhmQ.html - she tells part of her story, bringing up some of the issues we are now hearing. She also has a message of reconciliation. That said, as a parent I think, under any situation and especially under cultural norms of Afghanistan, it seems inappropriate for a stranger to be photographing a 10 year old child. It is done all the time, for profit or not. There is an aspect of exploitation in photography of indigenous, impoverished, forlorn, migrant or refugee people. Especially children. It is done under the name of 'journalism' 'getting the story', 'showing the world the truth'. I have no answer to this, just questions.

Thank you. I read a little about the photograph's story a while back and never made assumptions of how this woman felt or what "violations" were against her. Her tribe is a warring tribe, having someone take a photo of her without a face covering is the least of her worries throughout life.

Hmmm, Tonys comment he left on here seems to have disappeared. Just curious , was it you or him who deleted it Ted?

Ted, I saw the video you're talking about, and the first thing I thought about, it was irresponsible to do something like that. My first reaction was to unsubscribe from that channel.

You talked about Afghan Girl being one of the probably top 3 photographs ever. Even though I`m not a fan of top-x-lists, I would love to hear your opinion on what are your top/best/most important photographs ever. Maybe you could do like a miniseries where you talk about some of those for 5-10 minutes each, in no particular order or ranking? Or do I just not know that you have done something like that already? Just a thought that popped up while watching (good topic to have a long and extensive video on!!!). Cheers man and keep up the good work!

Thanks for taking the time for this guys! Ted, your videos have always been fresh and very well thought and communicated. Jaron, great to hear you join Ted, well spoken as well. This video is not a 5min soundbite, but we all need less of those. It's not possible to talk about real things in 5mins. In today's post-truth era, having sensible and educated conversations about topics are more important than ever. Always appreciate you guys time, thanks again!

This conversation included a series of issues: • The propriety of the circumstances involved in capturing the “Afghan Girl” photo. • The journalistic integrity of TN’s recent KZfaq video. • The impact of KZfaq/Google’s business model on journalistic standards. • The responsibility of content consumers to vet the content. Each of these is important issues. But, the curriculum they represent is too vast to address in a single video/pod cast. It needs to be broken down into what one professor I had called, “digestible chunks.” Regarding the recent video posted by TN, I have the following thoughts: We were not there. But, TN made a compelling observation the photo was posed. So, I’d like to know: • Was the photo posed? • Was the subject a child when the photo was taken? If it was posed as opposed to just being snapped while visiting a refugee relocation center, then I offer these follow up questions: • Did the photographer obtain a model’s release? • If a child was involved, did a parent or legal guardian authorize the photo shoot? • If a child was involved, was there another adult in the room or space and where/when the photo shoot occurred? [more for the photographer’s protection] • How was the model acknowledged in the publication of the photo? • If the photographer is from a western democracy that is protective of children with a system of law, regulation and administrative rules, does said photographer have an obligation to apply his/her ethical conduct on photographing people, including children, while visiting other nations/cultures or is it permissible for the visiting photographer to apply another standard of conduct? [During my career, I was a school administrator. Under Oregon law, we are very very careful about people photographing children on (or even near) school property. Owing to the concept of “in loco parentis” we have an assertive responsibility to protect the rights, dignity and identity of children. My training was to prioritize the child’s rights, protections and dignity first and then start working on the rest of the details.]

Ted The Artist Series is the best work that you do but I understood what happened. It’s like Keith Carter saying his his most personally satisfying work is often his least popular. Oh shucks.

Seeking controversy is not necessarily a Google or a youtube problem. This has been an issue with news sources for decades. The particular video in question is definitely controversial but having watched the video in it's entirety it seemed very obvious that he was just presenting an opinion and that he was still very torn on the whole issue and still loved the photo. I agree that he definitely came off way more authoritative than he should have given his sources and the seriousness of what he was implying. I also think that being a youtuber of his size comes with a higher level of responsibility than it is sometimes given. I appreciate this kind of in depth, professional level discussion. I was pretty torn on Tony's video and Im really glad to see this response.

Started watching this and realized it was the Podcast - so I waited to listen while walking my pup (Thanks! I love it whenever you drop an episode and I can get lost in it). Interested to know what your thoughts are given the republishing of the video with updated sources, and the follow-on video. I feel you were very quick to hold Tony to journalistic standards, and have done a piece that focuses how disappointed / angry you were with him and his journalism standard, how he handled the deletion of the video, how he handled sources, etc. All before giving him a chance to correct and respond. There is definitely some irony here, especially since Tony's history when there is controversy is to publish follow-on videos, clarifications, and correct mistakes etc. It's ok, this is not an angry post, I love the podcast and I do agree with a lot of the points that you have mentioned about everyone having responsibility for what we create and consume. I do think there has been a culture shift to believing victims first though - sure - can I see a situation where a white man comes in, there maybe isn't understanding of her culture, there are translation issues, he didn't catch her name, and the person meant to get her story didn't. But I am not going to pretend that I exactly know what happened. You have to ask yourself - why should our disposition to be to believe Steve McCurry's story first? I imagine the truth lies between the two accounts. I for one am happy to continue to follow the story and see where it all ends up. Would love to hear a followup episode on Jaron's thoughts on photography ethics (e.g. permission of people / places), photojournalism (e.g. the guy the other year that got caught posing the girl with the candle), going over boundaries to get landscape shots, etc. I think there are just as many pressures on photographers to go "beyond the boundaries" in the name of being compelling.

As the saying goes - Those who can , do. Those who can't, write hit pieces on those who do.

I've only seen a few of Northrup's videos, but he made me squirm even talking about Lightroom. Not a character for me.

Thanks Ted for your work. Both of you make very good points. It is very hard to sort out what is true in the "news" on the internet and is time consuming to check sources. I totally agree that much more critical thinking is needed by readers and viewers. I saw the video. I was surprised to see the video. I thought it would be a mistake. I did not take the time to research the sources. I did not trust the video. I did not forward the link. Yesterday I read a 1968 local newspaper. The information was curated. It was concise. It was factual and not opinion. I subscribed to the local paper electronically last year. Now if I could get away from the cable-internet "news" cycle. Love the artist series. Having made videos in the past and editing them I realize the amount of work needed to put out an edited video of decent quality. We need more quality and less quantity.

Thanks TED. Balanced perspective responsibly presented. I was disturbed by the inferences made on the recent KZfaq piece and did not take the appropriate steps to research the story properly. Your tactful approach in response has been very educational and is much appreciated. Thanks also to your colleague. I will be more careful in the future before judging the integrity and truthfulness of stories surrounding the works of important artist and photojournalists.

"Afgan Girl" has a name you know. It's Sharbat Gula. If you want to get all high and mighty about photo ethics, you might start by acknowledging the name and thus the humanity of the subject of the photograph you are discussing. Just sayin'.....

Artist Series is awesome! Art of Photography is honest and worth keeping. Ted and Sean Tucker are the two best photography (and maybe best overall) channels on KZfaq. Keep up the great work Ted.

Great commentary guys. People need to be reminded that there is little to no investigative reporting in this age of instant news on social media. Keep up the good work.

Thank you so much for this video. I haven't had the time to watch the whole thing yet, but I plan to as soon as I can. When you have an audience, you have a responsibility to that audience. That means your content matters. If you make an incorrect claim and your audience accepts that, it spreads into "common knowledge". Then it can get picked up by another person with an audience, repeated, and spread even further into "common knowledge". After this happens a few times, this incorrect claim now has a network of "sources" backing it up, even though the actual, single source is incorrect. It's immensely frustrating when you know, and can prove, than a commonly accepted "fact" is incorrect but can't do anything about it because the original source has a larger audience than you do.

This video holds up WaPo as an example of good investigative journalism. I would be curious what the hosts’ response is to Covington Catholic student story. They got this so wrong and continued to get it wrong despite publicly available contradicting evidence. So much so that they are getting a lawsuit.

I haven’t even finished this video yet and all I can say Ted, is that this video is bringing a fresh breeze of ethics on KZfaq. Well done and cheers to class.

HeyHo, I am writing this as a medical doctor/scientist and a passionate amateur photograph: Thank you for making this video and highlighting topics like naming and checking sources, posting openly an erratum and so on. cheers

Dammit Ted. You're the man. I love you what you do. I don't have time to watch this video right now, but I'm coming back to this! Keep on keeping on!